Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

Please allow me to take the comments one by one...

George - what I stated was NOT my opinion. You may not like it sir, you may not agree, that is your choice, but it is fact. I have been a diesel mechanic, and am a current degreed and licenced mechanical engineer (and electrical enegineer also), and I work for an extremely large global manufacturer of all manner of technology including many sorts of engines and turbomachinery, among a host of other technology driven products. If you want to go to the mat with me on engines, fuels, stochiometric eutectic points, composite materials, bearings, lubrication, economy, etc. then you should know I didnt just fall off the truck - nor do or have a hate for turbos or any specific tractor. I just want people to have facts presented fairly. Saying this is not to assume you are less qualified. I am sure you are knowledgeable, but if you dont like facts, you should check your emotions at the door and reconsider what was writen. My post was ONLY a clarification of Steves erroneous notes suggesting increased life, etc. etc.

There is nothing I know of on this earth that lasts longer when driven harder. Work is an engineering measure involving force and distance. Turbo engines will work harder than a normally aspriated engine, period. This affects all frictional surfaces, period. And whoever said turbos have less tendency to foul their crankcase oil needs to think again. higher combustion pressures from increased air volume (assuming constat density), and more fuel WILL result in MORE piston ring blow by. Synthetic oil will not save you from this - it merely has less of an affinity for changing state in the presence of unburned hydrocarbons and acids (yes acid) - remember the ONLY byproducts of perfect combustion are CO2 and WATER, we just dont have perfect combustion in our (IC) internal combustion engines. Now before I get flamed for hating synthetic oil, please take note I use it in two of my cars.

Here is a nifty quiz for you: What is the primary function of oil in an engine: a.) cooling; b.) lubrication; c.) to prevent wear.

My appologies if you or anyone else think I would never own a turbo. Have / would own and have no problem with them. Simply stated fact that they are not magic. If you want more you will have to sacrifice something. I believe one gentleman correctly pointed that out when he mentioned the trade off factor.

Other than the fact they increase the complexity and maintenance (starts with buying synthetic oil to handle the extreme heat, cooling it down before you shut it down, etc. etc. and moves forward from there. it is not impossible to handle - people do it ever day - but it is different and it is not less or simpler or longer lasting).

BTW - No fair trying to pit me against Case or NH or JD or Yanmar or any other engineering and manufacturing powerhouse (similar to my company), is not going to work. They are NOT ALL WRONG IN MY OPINION, so please dont suggest that I know something they do not. I never said that or anything like it (this is where you might want to read the original post again). They make great engines and turbos are one way to squeeze more muscle out of a smaller engine (but they are not more efficient - (in fact they use more fuel when the boost is engaged - the hope being things balance out to some extent because you spend at least some of the time in a range where the turbo is not engaged and there the engine will be a bit more efficient). Only efficiency gain I can see is in terms of HP per lb. of engine cast iron and I dont know if that has relevence here) - Power to wieght ratio will be up but be careful because adding $3000 to get four and a half HP at the PTO (or at the output shaft of the engine - both are same) is for most people a marginal or even unjustifyable benefit. The important thing is they kick torque at higher RPMs where a normal diesel might have less. Also remember torque is king - it is what grunts when nothing is moving. At that point HP is zero. Torque is the real essence, but horsepower is what we get quoted and are trained as consumers to worry about.

Next: As I stated the ratio of fuel to air for most petroluem derived (refined) products from jet to #2oil is about 16:1. operate a bit outside that range and you will run lean (hot) or rich - both have poor driveability issues. operate much more than a bit outside the range and you get nothing. so you stick to the formula. Now if you put more air in the combustion chamber, and that is what a turbo does, then you will need more fuel. Hence unless you intend to rewrite the laws of physics, you WILL use more fuel every time the turbo boosts in.

you said"...A normally aspirated diesel is a fine engine, and it keeps the price down. Isn't that what you seem to be trying to sell yourself on anyway?
But, it performs nowhere near as efficiently as it's turbocharged counterpart."

Selling myself? How do you define efficiency?

You said " Remember that word "efficiency" because it takes less fuel to make more power on a turbocharged engine. As most know, "fuel" is the heat source (exhaust gas temperature)of a diesel engine. More fuel, more heat. More heat, more problems."

Hmm sounds like you made a good case on the heat side but you need to revisit your thought process on efficiency and the whole nothing is for free, (horsepower inlcuded).

You said" Turbocharging takes an incomplete, inconsistant air/fuel charge and perfects it "especially" at lower RPMs where a non turbo diesel falls flat on it's face.. Turbocharging makes up for the lack of available O2 and allows the fuel charge to burn completely, instead of ending up in the crankcase as lubrication robbing soot. That alone is worth every cent to move up to at least a 3520."

Turbocharging does nothing of the kind. I am not sure where to start -but there is no "perfecting" and what ends up in the crankcase is higher wiht a turbo that is one reason why they normally use synthetic.

Next, I am not trying to sell my self on anything. I am comfortable with my current thinking on where I should be. I would probably like the brag factor on a turbo (they are neat), but the cost benefit at least on the 3520 size doesnt make good economic sense to me. Maybe I am missing something - if so I would be happy to hear what it is. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] The 3720 gains 11 1/2 HP over teh 3320 - and that is substantial. But I am already probably set to overbuy and I live in the coastal plains of texas (flat) and am conidering hill country property but that is just rolling hills, so I cant think of a good reason to go to a machine with more grunt.

I hate saying that becuase I can sometimes regret it (I usually always buy a bit more than I need).

Next whomever said the 3120 can barely pull itself might be a little harsh. Tall wet grass at 10 MPH OK. Box blading heavy gravel small rocky material - wouldnt think it would be a problem but ok. Bottom line I trust Deere more than that. These are their latest and greatest and I like them all. Most of all we should allow some room for those who own 3120s to live. They may have the perfect machine and have saved 800 bucks more than I on a 3320. For me I wanted to cross the 30 HP mark and get well over the 20 threshold for PTO HP.

Maybe I should go drive a 3720. Maybe I will be so impressed I will change my order and feel I have to have the extra power and can overlook the $$$$. Who knows. Just understand I am happy if you are happy with whatever you have. I just dont think it is healthy to lay out inaccurate information or present ponderings as if they were true on a site where so many come for knowledge and facts.

A turbo is a nifty way to get a normally aspriated engine to choke down more fuel and air in every swallow - Thazzit!! It costs power on the back end due to increased backpressure of the exhaust turbine that drives the intake compressor.

Next, I believe someone said turbo d's are lower in compression - sometimes yes they are, that is so once you apply the boost they are still within design tolerances of the crank seats (journals), connecting rods, etc.

Secondly, the purpose of my post was to create a new area for the discussion of facts I feel were misrepresented by Steve in the "which tractor 3120, 3320,3520 or 3720 discussion that preceeded this one.

Finally, yanmar is a brand (among others that is near and dear to my heart) small diesels (like the ones in these compact tractors), are the safety net for one of my favorite hobbies. Yacht racing. I am retired now and only cruise in the virgin islants, etc. for fun now but I have litterally put my life in the hands of a diesel engine on more times than I care to recall. Love them and think the Japanesee versions are great. (Glad we got that straight).

Remerber, not selling, dont hate, and just because I joined a week ago doesnt mean I know nothing - remeber the comment you always hear on talk radio "...long time listener, first time caller..." I tried to earn the right to speak on this forum by listening to/reading the wisdom of many of you for months. Also studied on my own at lenght. Finally I went to many dealers and was routinely unimpressed at how little they know about their products. At any rate, I now hope to help others and enjoy interesting conversation at the same time. I trust you all share these interests.

I may try to respond to other flames but I think this one got most of it. Think I will check into a nap. See you later.

Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

You are correct sir.

Funny I almost mentioned Yanmar's high seas reputation.

You said it yourself, Torque is king in tractors yet they sell them by HP. I've always wondered why they don't put 30 hp 80cc 2-cycle motocross engines in tractors??? Sure would be cheaper. All joking aside, As an engineer/sailor/land improver, you would appreciate the extra torque after maybe 3 minutes of tractoring. Depends on your tasks at hand and your budget. The 3720 in my opinion, is the best all around compact tractor available. You owe it to yourself to at least try one so you don't lose sleep at night thinking about it. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

Interesting. What brought this post out of the woodwork? Are you trying to use the forum to justify your purchase to yourself? If so, I might have understood something like this... "just ordered a 3x20 and decided to go non-turbo for the following reasons..." But this post has taken a decidedly different slant, and I for one, am wondering why a new poster opted for the "stir em' up" style.

Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

Actually I think you might have meant to say if I were trying to use the forum to justify my purchase to myself I might have posted with the title you gave.

Didnt understand the "if not" phrase you inserted.

Have tried to indicate my reasons - someone named "stevens" I believe in a prior post had turned a conversation toward turbos and then said they are more fuel efficient, save gas, extend life, etc, etc. Instead of responding with a clarification of facts there I decided to risk being flamed and started a new thread on the subject.

Seems there is no one really objecting to any of the clarifications, just people suggesting I have some latent fear or dislike for turbos (not).

By contrast some others have suggested I give more consideration to a turbo version one if I am buying in the 3x20 line. I invited this comment and appreciate it, but it turned the conversation a bit away from fact clarification about a fine piece of add on gear to why dont you own one...

As I admitted that could be what I need to do, but it has little to do with just straightening out some facts for those who depend on this forum for their facts. Cant make it any clearer.

As to why I have opted to "stir it up" from the get go, again I have explained that...approx 200 hours reading and studying posts, data and comparisons prior to joining. Joined mostly because I think have something to offer (hopefully), and secondarily because I want to refine what I have learned.

Also my wife might say I have become a bit of a fanatic too!

That said, maybe I should start a new post to ask what people think about the 3320 vs a 3520 or 3720 in terms of real world capability, realistic need vs added cost, value over the long haul, resale, etc. Guess it is never too late to reconsider if like Kyle suggested, it would probably take me about 3 min on the tractor to realize and appreciate the difference.

Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

<font color="blue"> someone named "stevens" I believe in a prior post had turned a conversation toward turbos and then said they are more fuel efficient, save gas, extend life, etc, etc. Instead of responding with a clarification of facts there I decided to risk being flamed and started a new thread on the subject. </font>
Then it would have made more sense to reply to 'stevens' instead of inititating a new thread that had no context.

Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

Does anyone ever actually read what was written and respond in a manner consistent with what they feel the post author was trying to accomplish or is this just a gold member bashing the new guys forum. Mike you fit in this slot buddy.

After humbling myself in my last message by agreeing to listen to anyone who has anything at all meaningful to offer about their experience relating to the selection of 33vs 35 vs37 and admiting I would be fine with changing my order if I learned from knowldegeable forum members that one seemed to hold a price justified advantage over the other, I would hope you as a platnium super special member would have more to offer than piling on and criticising me for what you felt was an out of context post.

I am directing this to everyone (not just you Mike). Try offering something of actual value. If you dont like the subject or think the post is without proper basis in your opinion, DRIVE ON and leave the rest of us who are interested and concerned with the subject at hand to generate productive if sometimes controversial discussion.

AGAIN I WOULD INVITE ANYONE WHO HAS SOMETHING TO OFFER REGARDING THEIR EXPERIENCES AND HOW THEY ARRIVED AT THEIR CHOICES REGARDING THIS LINE OF JD's TO RESPOND. Thank you for your time.

Re: turbo vs non turbo - JD 3x20

This is not exactly what you are looking for, but this is my experience as per the use of a turbo vs a not-turbo. I am more than likely the only person here that has actually owned two tractors with the exact same engine except one with a turbo and one without. Both engines had the same compression. The only difference between the engines in the tune of the pump and the injector settings. The torque doesn't even compare. When encountering a hard pull, you can feel the turbo spool-up and the torque rise come into effect. When brush hogging and I drop off a steep bank, with the non-turbo tractor I might have to drop as much as two gears. With turbo tractor, I just give it some fuel and the torque comes in and away we go. No dropping a gear or two like the non-turbo tractor.